Enterprise MrgOperating system · Redhat
CVE-2010-4179
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe installation documentation for Red Hat Enterprise Messaging, Realtime and Grid (MRG) 1.3 recommends that Condor should be configured so that the MRG Management Console (cumin) can submit jobs for users, which creates a trusted channel with insufficient access control that allows local users with the ability to publish to a broker to run jobs as arbitrary users via Condor QMF plug-ins.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceIn MRG 1.3, the Condor integration with the Cumin management console creates a trusted channel lacking proper access control enforcement. Local users with the ability to publish messages to the broker can exploit Condor QMF plug-ins to submit jobs that execute with the privileges of arbitrary users, resulting in local privilege escalation.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Enterprise MrgOperating system
= 1.3CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify MRG 1.3 installationRun 'rpm -q mrg-release' or 'rpm -qa | grep mrg' to check if Red Hat MRG is installed. Check version with 'cat /etc/redhat-release' or 'rpm -qi mrg-release'Affected if MRG version 1.3 is installed
-
Confirm Condor component presenceRun 'rpm -q condor' or check if Condor daemon is running with 'ps aux | grep condor'Affected if Condor is installed and running as part of MRG 1.3
-
Check for Cumin management consoleRun 'rpm -q cumin' or 'rpm -qa | grep cumin' to verify Cumin is installedAffected if Cumin management console is present in the MRG 1.3 environment
-
Inspect QMF broker ACL configurationExamine the QMF broker configuration files in /etc/qpidd/ or locations specified in the Condor QMF documentation. Look for ACL files or authorization settings controlling the condor QMF plug-in channelAffected if The QMF broker lacks proper ACL enforcement on the Condor plug-in channel, allowing unauthenticated or unauthorized message publication
A user is affected if MRG 1.3 is installed with Condor and Cumin, and the QMF broker ACLs are missing or misconfigured for the Condor QMF plug-in channel, permitting unauthorized job submission.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement proper access control lists (ACLs) on the Condor QMF plug-in channel and broker, restricting which users can submit jobs and enforcing authorization checks before job execution.
Fix this in Enterprise Mrg
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-4179 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2010-4179 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data